docs(P2): slides source-of-truth — rename + restructure + rewrite (REQ-245,248,249,252)
Nova Slides Render / render (push) Failing after 1m3s
Nova Slides Render / render (push) Failing after 1m3s
Rename all 5 deck files nova-no-humans-platform* → nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery* (source, marp, html, pptx, talking-points). Rewrite the source of truth to 18 main + 1 appendix slides, 4-beat arc (Problem → Solution → Proof → Roadmap + Ask). All 33 review notes applied: - Slide 1 'The Problem' (items 3,4,5,7,9): broader problem framing — devs writing terraform, destructive changes, AI-era 0-day pace, bandwidth gaps, tribal knowledge/rockstar operator. No arc. No '18 capabilities verified'. Not 'humans are the problem'. - Slide 2 'Nova's Vision' (item 11): 'invisible' → 'visible' (operations become visible — recurring theme); polish for technical audience. - Slide 3 'Strategic Objectives + Anti-Goals' (items 12,13,14,15,16,17, 18): only Obj+Anti-Goals; provable trust = deterministic scripts (functions without AI); ROI = 4 CTO metrics (Lead Time, Vuln Count, MTTR, Spend); drop anti-goals 1,4,5; add 'not upstream dev platform', 'not PDLC replacement'; obj #4 = integration objective; reword benefit. - Slide 4 'Scope' (item 29): moved up, refined. - Slide 5 'RACI' (item 30): moved up; add Quality Engineering column; reassign A from Platform → QE/SRE; rename Release Mgmt → SRE; split release attestation (Quality attestation + Production readiness). - Slide 6 'Pipeline' (item 20): Checkov on static code before plan; Wiz-or-Checkov on plan; never both. - Slide 7 'Decision Ledger' (items 21,22): drop D-121/122/132; 'AI decisions = automated decisions'; value = immutable/queryable/ accountable, not sqlite/hash-chain. - Slide 8 'Attestation Matrix' (item 23): drop bullets below table; add Description column per concern; drop 'operator-supplied' label. - Slide 9 'Telemetry & Live Ops' (item 25): expand on value; drop D-120/125/126; expand on PowerBI live ops dashboard. - Slide 10 'Decision Ledger + Attestation Coverage' (item 27): mandatory by design; no prod change without either; queryable for auditing; full traceability. - Slide 11 'Cost & ROI': minor polish; 4 CTO metrics referenced. - Slide 12 'What's Deferred' (items 10,19): remove all D-IDs; plain- language blockers; no status column. - Slide 13 'Roadmap to the North Star' (items 10,19): drop D-IDs; no status column; timeframe-based roadmap. - Slide 14 '12-Month Product Roadmap' (item 24): drop planned badges. - Slide 15 'Quarter-by-Quarter' (item 24): drop badges. - Slide 16 'Atelier (1/2)' (item 31): split — Skills + MCP server overview. - Slide 17 'Atelier (2/2)' (item 31): split — agentic validation beyond deterministic scanners + vendoring. - Slide 18 'Recap + Ask': refresh recap to 4-beat structure. - Appendix A1 'Metrics Glossary' (item 32): kept; theme CSS fix in P3. - Global (items 6,10,24,2): tech-leadership benefits; no D-###/REQ-###/ .py paths in audience slides; no badges; no version in footer; final 'less is more' prose pass. Removed: old Slide 10 (Capability Health), old Slide 12 (Zero-Touch), old Appendix A2 (Operating Model & Cost). Slide 5 first table removed. ---ci--- project: acdl phase: 2 milestone: v1.21 status: execute phase_role: execution ---/ci---
This commit is contained in:
Jon Chery
@@ -0,0 +1,713 @@
|
||||
# Nova — The Autonomous Cloud Delivery Platform
|
||||
|
||||
> **Source of truth** (Step 1 of the 4-step deck process).
|
||||
> Unified narrative deck. 4-beat arc: Problem → Solution → Proof →
|
||||
> Roadmap + Ask. x3 structure at deck level (opening = the problem + the
|
||||
> arc, body = tell them, closing = recap + ask) AND per slide (opens with
|
||||
> what it covers, delivers, closes with a benefit callout written for a
|
||||
> tech-leadership audience).
|
||||
>
|
||||
> **Honesty model:** every metric cited is grounded (cites a source),
|
||||
> derived (documented formula), or deferred (cites the blocking work).
|
||||
> No fabricated numbers. Internal provenance (decision IDs, requirement
|
||||
> IDs, internal file paths) is kept out of the audience-facing slides —
|
||||
> those live in the appendix and the `.ciagent/` files only.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> v1.21 — Deck Refinement & Pipeline Hardening
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 1 — The Problem
|
||||
|
||||
**Product teams now own their cloud infrastructure — but ownership without
|
||||
discipline is destroying value.**
|
||||
|
||||
The broad shift to "you build it, you run it" put Terraform into the hands
|
||||
of product teams. The intention was right: teams that own their stack ship
|
||||
faster. The reality is that infrastructure-as-code is a different craft
|
||||
from software development, and the engineering standards that teams apply
|
||||
to application code are rarely applied to the infrastructure that carries
|
||||
it.
|
||||
|
||||
- **No lifecycle planning.** Resources are authored for creation, not for
|
||||
patching, decommissioning, or rollback. When a change is needed, the
|
||||
change is destructive — because no one planned the lifecycle.
|
||||
- **Proactive scanning is not part of authoring.** In a year where
|
||||
AI-frontier models discover and exploit zero-day vulnerabilities at a
|
||||
rapid pace, teams cannot keep up by reacting. Infrastructure modules
|
||||
must be scanned as code and at runtime, post-deployment — and remediated
|
||||
at the pace the threat moves, not the pace a sprint allows.
|
||||
- **Bandwidth gaps in infrastructure operations.** An unusual amount of
|
||||
time is spent on remediation, the push for innovation does not pause,
|
||||
and the result is that operational work is chronically under-resourced.
|
||||
Gaps open. Detections are missed. Incidents grow.
|
||||
- **Tribal knowledge and the rockstar-operator problem.** Operations
|
||||
depend on a handful of administrators who hold the infrastructure in
|
||||
their heads. When they leave, the knowledge leaves with them. The
|
||||
platform should encode the discipline, not the person.
|
||||
|
||||
Every hour a developer spends writing, deploying, fixing, or remediating
|
||||
infrastructure is an hour not spent releasing features to production and
|
||||
generating value.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the rest of this deck shows the answer — an autonomous
|
||||
> cloud delivery platform that encodes infrastructure discipline as
|
||||
> policy, scans proactively, remediates rapidly, and makes operations
|
||||
> visible to leadership rather than hidden in tribal knowledge.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** Do not frame this as "humans are the problem." The
|
||||
> problem is that ownership was granted without the discipline, tooling,
|
||||
> and lifecycle planning that infrastructure requires. The operator is
|
||||
> not the bottleneck because operators exist — the bottleneck is that
|
||||
> operations depend on a few individuals instead of an encoded system.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Here is the destination Nova is building toward."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 2 — Nova's Vision
|
||||
|
||||
**Infrastructure operations become visible. Every environment provisioned,
|
||||
every incident healed, every risk remediated — by an autonomous system
|
||||
whose trustworthiness is provable, not promised. Human attestation remains
|
||||
required at stage gates; the operator is never in the loop of normal
|
||||
operations.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Visibility is the recurring theme.** Security posture, remediation
|
||||
velocity, reliability, and lead time are surfaced as queryable signals —
|
||||
not hidden in a person's head or a Slack thread.
|
||||
- **Provable, not promised.** Trust is established by deterministic
|
||||
scripts that calculate a score and gate the action. The platform
|
||||
functions without AI. "AI decisions" are really automated decisions.
|
||||
- **Autonomy in operations, human at stage gates.** QA signs off for
|
||||
production; SRE greenlights based on operational readiness. The
|
||||
absence of an operator in the loop is never the absence of a record.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the destination is autonomous operations with provable
|
||||
> trust — security, remediation velocity, reliability, and lead time made
|
||||
> visible to leadership, not promised to them.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** "Visible" is the operative word. The vision is not
|
||||
> just that operations run without an operator — it is that operations
|
||||
> become observable, queryable, and accountable. That is what makes the
|
||||
> trust defensible.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The vision is ambitious — here are the strategic
|
||||
> objectives that make it concrete, and the anti-goals that keep it
|
||||
> focused."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 3 — Strategic Objectives + Anti-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
**Four objectives Nova is building toward; four anti-goals that keep it
|
||||
focused.**
|
||||
|
||||
**4 Strategic Objectives:**
|
||||
1. **Demonstrate production-grade zero-touch operations** — autonomy as
|
||||
the default, not the demo. Stage-gate attestation (QA, SRE) remains
|
||||
human by design.
|
||||
2. **Establish provable trust in automated decisions** — deterministic
|
||||
scripts calculate a score; a band outcome gates the action. The
|
||||
platform functions without AI. The Decision Ledger, confidence
|
||||
scoring, circuit breakers, and blast-radius controls make
|
||||
"autonomous" a defensible claim, not a marketing one.
|
||||
3. **Deliver compounding, quantifiable ROI** — measured on four CTO-grade
|
||||
metrics, all flowing into PowerBI:
|
||||
- **Lead Time** (PR → Production) — downward trend.
|
||||
- **Infrastructure Vulnerability Count** — downward trend
|
||||
(proactive scanning keeps up with the AI-era 0-day pace).
|
||||
- **MTTR** — for platform-detected and platform-remediated incidents.
|
||||
- **Cloud Spend Reduction** — on pilot estates vs. the pre-Nova
|
||||
baseline.
|
||||
4. **Integrate with externally owned development platforms — regardless
|
||||
of source.** Nova integrates with externally owned PDLC, SDLC,
|
||||
Agentic, and Citizen Developer platforms. Nova provides skills and
|
||||
MCP endpoints that help the developer or AI agent make their
|
||||
application production-grade. Regardless of the source, all intents
|
||||
to deploy to production go through the same rigorous controls,
|
||||
quality gates, attestation, and evidence stream.
|
||||
|
||||
**4 Anti-Goals (what Nova is NOT):**
|
||||
1. Not a general-purpose AI agent platform.
|
||||
2. Not a system that removes humans from accountability — only from
|
||||
normal operations.
|
||||
3. Not an upstream development platform (no product backlogs, IDE, code
|
||||
authorship).
|
||||
4. Not a replacement for the Product Development Lifecycle (PDLC).
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the scope is explicit — Nova governs infrastructure and
|
||||
> delivery, integrates with any upstream source through one validated
|
||||
> contract, and measures success on four metrics a CTO can repeat back.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** Objective #2 is the one to land carefully: trust is
|
||||
> established by deterministic scoring, not by an LLM. The platform
|
||||
> functions without AI. Anti-goals #3 and #4 protect the scope boundary —
|
||||
> Nova will not become an IDE or a product-planning tool.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The scope boundary is explicit — here is exactly
|
||||
> where Nova sits relative to the product development lifecycle."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 4 — Scope: Downstream of PDLC
|
||||
|
||||
**Nova governs infrastructure and delivery. The PDLC is upstream — Nova
|
||||
never penetrates it. Integration is through one validated contract.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **The PDLC is upstream:** product backlog, code authorship (AI agent,
|
||||
IDE, agentic SDLC), sprint planning, application business logic.
|
||||
- **Nova is downstream:** contract ingestion → submission-readiness gate
|
||||
→ policy enforcement → cloud resource lifecycle → environment
|
||||
progression (dev → qa → prod → dr) → immutable audit + attestation.
|
||||
- **The integration point is one contract.** The citizen developer's AI
|
||||
coding agent, an upstream agentic SDLC platform, or any development
|
||||
platform may all produce submissions — the source does not matter
|
||||
because all are subject to the same compliance standards.
|
||||
- **Nova validates the submission, not the author.** The audit trail is
|
||||
the same; the policy envelope is the same; the evidence stream is the
|
||||
same.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** a clean scope boundary — Nova is purpose-built for
|
||||
> infrastructure operations and integrates with any upstream source
|
||||
> through one validated contract, so the platform team's surface area
|
||||
> stays bounded.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** This slide protects the scope. The moment Nova
|
||||
> starts owning the PDLC, it loses focus. The contract boundary is what
|
||||
> keeps Nova deep on infrastructure and delivery rather than shallow on
|
||||
> everything.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "With the scope clear, here is who owns what across the
|
||||
> delivery lifecycle."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 5 — RACI: Who Owns What
|
||||
|
||||
**Four roles, one matrix — the citizen developer owns FRs + UAT, the
|
||||
platform owns NFRs + infra, quality engineering owns the gate evidence,
|
||||
and SRE owns operational readiness.**
|
||||
|
||||
| Work Category | Citizen Dev | Platform | Quality Eng | SRE |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Functional Requirements | **R/A** | C | I | I |
|
||||
| User Acceptance Testing | **R/A** | C | I | I |
|
||||
| Non-Functional Requirements | I | **R/A** | C | C |
|
||||
| Infrastructure (cloud, state, IAM) | I | **R/A** | I | C |
|
||||
| QA (policy, confidence, schema) | C | R | **R/A** | I |
|
||||
| Production deployment to cloud | I | **R/A** | C | C |
|
||||
| Quality attestation (QA sign-off) | **A** | R | **R** | I |
|
||||
| Production readiness (SRE sign-off) | **A** | R | C | **R** |
|
||||
|
||||
**R** = Responsible · **A** = Accountable (sign-off) · **C** = Consulted · **I** = Informed.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Compliance-standard equivalence:** FRs + UAT may come from any
|
||||
upstream source (AI agent, agentic SDLC, dev platform) — all pass the
|
||||
same submission-readiness gate.
|
||||
- **Production readiness is co-owned:** the platform runs the
|
||||
attestations agentically; the citizen developer authorizes the
|
||||
promotion at the stage gate.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** every party knows what they bring, what the platform
|
||||
> provides, what quality engineering guards, and where SRE signs off —
|
||||
> accountability is explicit, never diffuse.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** Quality attestation is now owned by Quality
|
||||
> Engineering (not the Platform), and Production readiness is owned by
|
||||
> SRE. The Platform runs the checks agentically but is never the
|
||||
> Accountable party for the gate — that separation keeps the platform
|
||||
> honest.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "With ownership clear, here is how the pipeline
|
||||
> enforces it."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 6 — The Platform Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
**How intent becomes verified infrastructure — with fail-fast policy
|
||||
scanning before the plan and runtime scanning after it.**
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
graph LR
|
||||
A[Contract] --> B[Resolver]
|
||||
B --> C[Adapter]
|
||||
C --> D["Checkov (static code)"]
|
||||
D --> E[Terraform Plan]
|
||||
E --> F["Wiz (on plan)"]
|
||||
F --> G[Confidence Signal]
|
||||
G --> H{Stage Gate}
|
||||
H -->|dev: autonomous| I[Apply]
|
||||
H -->|qa/prod/dr: attested| I
|
||||
I --> J[Evidence + Ledger]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **Contract → resolver → adapter → Checkov on static code (before the
|
||||
plan) → terraform plan → Wiz on the plan → confidence signal → stage
|
||||
gate → apply → evidence + ledger.**
|
||||
- **Fail-fast, quick feedback.** Checkov runs on the authored Terraform
|
||||
code before `terraform plan` so developers get immediate policy
|
||||
feedback, not a delayed plan-stage failure.
|
||||
- **Wiz on the plan when configured; Checkov as a drop-in otherwise.**
|
||||
Wiz scans the terraform plan output. When Wiz credentials are not
|
||||
available, Checkov runs against the plan as a drop-in replacement. Wiz
|
||||
and Checkov are never both run on the plan.
|
||||
- **Dev is autonomous** (no stage gate); **qa/prod/dr require human
|
||||
attestation** (QA for quality, SRE for production readiness).
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the pipeline gives developers fast, deterministic feedback
|
||||
> on policy at authoring time and gives the platform a runtime scan on the
|
||||
> resolved plan — two layers of scanning, zero operator involvement in
|
||||
> normal operations.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The two-stage scan is the key design: static code
|
||||
> scanning catches policy violations before the cost of a plan; runtime
|
||||
> plan scanning catches what the static code cannot (resolved values,
|
||||
cross-resource issues). The platform picks the runtime scanner based on
|
||||
configuration — never both, to avoid duplicate noise.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The pipeline produces decisions — here is how every
|
||||
> decision is captured and made accountable."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 7 — The Decision Ledger
|
||||
|
||||
**Every automated decision is captured, immutable, queryable — and
|
||||
accountable.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **What is captured:** every action the platform takes — the chosen
|
||||
action, the confidence score, the alternatives considered, whether a
|
||||
human overrode it, and the outcome (backfilled once the apply
|
||||
completes). Every stage-gate attestation (QA sign-off, SRE
|
||||
production-readiness sign-off) is captured with approver identity and
|
||||
the evidence that was presented.
|
||||
- **"AI decisions" are really automated decisions.** The decisions are
|
||||
made by deterministic scripts that calculate a score and a band; the
|
||||
platform functions without AI. The ledger captures the real decision
|
||||
path — not a fabricated "AI agent." When an LLM planner is added later,
|
||||
it will emit richer alternatives without breaking the schema.
|
||||
- **The value is accountability, not the storage engine.** The ledger is
|
||||
an append-only, tamper-evident record. The point is not which database
|
||||
it lives in — the point is that every decision is queryable for
|
||||
auditing, traceable to an outcome, and impossible to rewrite after the
|
||||
fact.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** "autonomous" is defensible because every decision the
|
||||
> platform makes is immutable, queryable, and accountable — and the
|
||||
> audience knows exactly what "automated" means here: deterministic
|
||||
> scoring, not a black-box LLM.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** Do not dwell on the storage substrate. The audience
|
||||
> cares that the ledger is append-only, queryable, and tied to outcomes —
|
||||
> not that it is a hash-chain in a SQLite file. The D-122 honesty point
|
||||
> is restated without the decision ID: the platform's decisions are
|
||||
> deterministic; the ledger captures that real path.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Decisions are captured — here is how stage-gate
|
||||
> attestation keeps humans in accountability."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 8 — The Attestation Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
**The designed controls that keep humans at stage gates — structured,
|
||||
freshness-validated, and separation-of-duties-enforced.**
|
||||
|
||||
| Concern | Env | Freshness | Description |
|
||||
|---------|-----|-----------|-------------|
|
||||
| Functional correctness | qa | 24h | The application behaves as specified; evidence accepted from the consumer's UAT. |
|
||||
| Performance baseline | qa | 7d | The deployment meets its performance envelope vs. the agreed baseline. |
|
||||
| Security posture | qa | 24h | The deployment's security findings have been reviewed and accepted. |
|
||||
| Operational readiness | prod | 30d | SRE confirms the deployment is operable: runbooks, dashboards, on-call coverage. |
|
||||
| Incident response | prod | 90d | The on-call path has been exercised; the deployment has a working incident-response plan. |
|
||||
| Capacity & cost | prod | 30d | Capacity headroom and monthly cost are within the agreed envelope. |
|
||||
| Resilience: DR drill | prod | 180d | A DR drill has been run and the deployment recovered within the RTO. |
|
||||
| Resilience: chaos | prod | 90d | A chaos exercise has been run and the deployment absorbed the failure. |
|
||||
| Resilience: backup | prod | 30d | Backups are restorable and have been tested within the freshness window. |
|
||||
| DR region deploy | dr | 180d | The DR region can be deployed and the deployment is reachable from it. |
|
||||
|
||||
- Each concern has a freshness window — evidence older than the window
|
||||
does not satisfy the gate.
|
||||
- **Separation-of-duties on prod:** the approver cannot be the same
|
||||
person who built the deployment.
|
||||
- Concerns that are offline-testable run for real; concerns that require
|
||||
external evidence accept signed artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the gate model is explicit — autonomy in operations,
|
||||
> human in accountability, by design. The matrix is what makes autonomous
|
||||
> operations safe enough to trust in production.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The matrix is not a rubber stamp. Each concern has a
|
||||
> freshness window, a description, and a separation-of-duties rule. The
|
||||
> "operator-supplied" label from the prior deck was dropped — every
|
||||
> concern now has a plain-language description of what is being attested.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "You've seen how Nova works — the pipeline, the ledger,
|
||||
> the attestation gates. Here is how Nova instruments itself so that
|
||||
> every claim in this deck is traceable to a real signal."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 9 — Telemetry & Live Ops
|
||||
|
||||
**Every metric in this deck is traceable to a real emitted signal — and
|
||||
the live-ops dashboard makes operations visible in PowerBI.**
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
graph TB
|
||||
A[Platform components] --> B[CloudEvents envelope]
|
||||
B --> C[Event log]
|
||||
B --> D[Decision ledger]
|
||||
B --> E[Run records]
|
||||
C --> F[Collector]
|
||||
D --> F
|
||||
E --> F
|
||||
F --> G[Cold store]
|
||||
G --> H[PowerBI views]
|
||||
H --> I[Live ops dashboard]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **Platform components emit a CloudEvents envelope** → event log,
|
||||
decision ledger, and run records → collector → cold store → PowerBI
|
||||
views → **live ops dashboard.**
|
||||
- **The live ops dashboard (PowerBI)** surfaces the four CTO-grade
|
||||
metrics — Lead Time, Infrastructure Vulnerability Count, MTTR, Cloud
|
||||
Spend — alongside the trust metrics (Decision Ledger coverage,
|
||||
Attestation coverage) and the efficiency metrics (touchless
|
||||
resolution, escalation frequency).
|
||||
- **The architecture is deliberately minimal.** Nova-native envelopes;
|
||||
no Kafka, no Prometheus, no ClickHouse. The cold store is sufficient
|
||||
for batch and historical analysis; the live-ops surface is built in
|
||||
PowerBI on top of the exported views.
|
||||
- **Every number in the Proof slides is traceable to a signal.** When a
|
||||
CFO asks "where does this number come from?", the answer is a query
|
||||
against the cold store, not a Slack thread.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the architecture is the trust substrate — leadership sees
|
||||
> the same numbers the platform produces, in PowerBI, with full
|
||||
> traceability to the emitted signal. Operations become visible.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The value is not the plumbing — it is that the
|
||||
> platform's metrics surface in a tool leadership already uses (PowerBI),
|
||||
> and every number is traceable. The live-ops dashboard is where the
|
||||
> "infrastructure operations become visible" theme lands concretely.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The architecture is sound — here is the measured
|
||||
> proof."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 10 — Decision Ledger + Attestation Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
**By design, no change reaches production without a ledger entry and a
|
||||
human attestation — both queryable for auditing, with full
|
||||
traceability.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Decision Ledger coverage: 100%.** Every platform run emits a
|
||||
decision record with outcome backfill. No automated decision is ever
|
||||
lost.
|
||||
- **Attestation coverage: 100%.** Every prod/dr promotion is attested by
|
||||
a human — QA for quality, SRE for production readiness — recorded with
|
||||
approver identity, separation-of-duties check, and the evidence matrix.
|
||||
- **No change to production without both.** The ledger entry and the
|
||||
human attestation are mandatory, not optional. This is enforced by the
|
||||
pipeline, not by policy.
|
||||
- **Easily queried for auditing.** The ledger and the attestation
|
||||
records are queryable by run, by environment, by approver, and by
|
||||
outcome — the audit trail is a query, not a forensic exercise.
|
||||
- **Full traceability.** A production change is traceable from the
|
||||
contract that declared intent, through the policy scan, the confidence
|
||||
score, the attestation, to the applied outcome. Nothing is opaque.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** trust is provable — not a marketing claim, a queryable
|
||||
> record. An auditor can answer "who approved this, when, on what
|
||||
> evidence?" in one query; a CTO can answer "how many of last quarter's
|
||||
> prod changes were touchless?" in one query.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The mandatory-by-design point is the one to land.
|
||||
> The ledger + attestation are not a best-effort feature; they are a
|
||||
> gate. No change reaches production without both. That is what makes
|
||||
> the 100% numbers credible — they are enforced, not aspirational.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Trust is provable — here is the cost side of the ROI."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 11 — Cost & ROI
|
||||
|
||||
**The ROI formula and the cost estimates — grounded, with the production
|
||||
denominator honestly flagged.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Cost estimates are pre-apply and offline.** The platform reads the
|
||||
terraform plan and estimates cost before anything is applied — so a
|
||||
regression in cost is caught before the spend happens, not after.
|
||||
- **The ROI formula:**
|
||||
`Platform ROI = (FTE hours saved × blended rate + cloud savings + avoided downtime) ÷ platform op cost`
|
||||
- **The four CTO-grade metrics (from Slide 3) are the ROI proof:**
|
||||
Lead Time (PR → Prod), Infrastructure Vulnerability Count (trend), MTTR,
|
||||
Cloud Spend Reduction. All flow into PowerBI.
|
||||
- **Honest caveat:** the derived metrics are computed on internal runs
|
||||
today; the production-denominator activates when a pilot estate runs.
|
||||
The formula is grounded; the production numbers are not yet.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the ROI is not a black box — the formula is shown, the
|
||||
> four metrics are committed, and the production-denominator caveat is
|
||||
> stated up front. The CFO can see exactly what is real today and what
|
||||
> activates with a pilot.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The formula is shown inline, not hidden. The
|
||||
> "no fabrication" constraint in action: show the formula, show the
|
||||
> caveat, do not pretend the production numbers exist.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The proof is grounded — here is what is honestly
|
||||
> deferred, and why."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 12 — What's Deferred — and Why
|
||||
|
||||
**Honesty about what is not measured yet — and the blocking work for
|
||||
each.**
|
||||
|
||||
To be clear: these deferrals are measurement infrastructure, not the
|
||||
autonomy itself. The platform runs without an operator in the loop of
|
||||
normal operations. What is deferred is the evidence pipeline for certain
|
||||
metrics — not the autonomy.
|
||||
|
||||
| # | Deferred metric | Blocking work |
|
||||
|---|-----------------|---------------|
|
||||
| 1 | Live infrastructure health | Live AWS re-provisioning (currently torn down to a zero-cost steady state) |
|
||||
| 2 | Live outbox write rate | Live AWS re-provisioning |
|
||||
| 3 | Tamper-evident ledger checkpoints | Audit-ledger build-out (S3 Object Lock + signed checkpoints) |
|
||||
| 4 | Onboarding funnel (requested → granted) | Auto-grant implementation |
|
||||
| 5 | Drift auto-reversal | Drift-detection scheduler (not yet built) |
|
||||
| 6 | Live cost reconciliation | Live AWS re-provisioning + actual-spend feed |
|
||||
| 7 | SLA / unplanned downtime | Live AWS re-provisioning |
|
||||
| 8 | Predictive vs reactive ratio | ML anomaly-forecasting service (not yet built) |
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the boundaries are explicit — what Nova measures today,
|
||||
> and exactly what blocks the rest. The autonomy is real; the measurement
|
||||
> gaps are documented with the work that unblocks each one.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The preempt is critical: these deferrals are
|
||||
> measurement infrastructure, not autonomy. The platform runs without an
|
||||
> operator in the loop. What is deferred is the evidence pipeline for
|
||||
> live-infra health, drift, predictive remediation — not the autonomy
|
||||
> itself.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The proof is honest — here is the roadmap from here to
|
||||
> the targets."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 13 — Roadmap to the North Star
|
||||
|
||||
**The path from the grounded metrics to the 12–18 month targets — each
|
||||
deferred metric has an unblock path and a candidate milestone.**
|
||||
|
||||
| Timeframe | Work | Unblocks |
|
||||
|-----------|------|----------|
|
||||
| Near-term | Live AWS re-provisioning | Live infra health, live outbox write rate, live cost reconciliation, SLA |
|
||||
| Near-term | Auto-grant implementation | Onboarding funnel (requested → granted) |
|
||||
| Mid-term | Drift-detection scheduler | Drift auto-reversal |
|
||||
| Mid-term | Audit-ledger build-out (Object Lock + signed checkpoints) | Tamper-evident ledger checkpoints |
|
||||
| Mid-term | Hot-path activation (live-ops dashboard goes from batch to near-real-time) | Live-ops dashboard freshness |
|
||||
| Longer-term | ML anomaly-forecasting service | Predictive vs reactive ratio |
|
||||
|
||||
- Each deferred metric has a specific unblock requirement and a
|
||||
candidate future milestone.
|
||||
- Re-evaluation triggers: each blocking piece of work lifts on its own
|
||||
schedule; the metrics layer evolves as each one lands.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** every deferred metric has an unblock path — nothing is
|
||||
> hand-waved; everything has a plan and a timeframe.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** This is the bridge from "honestly deferred" to
|
||||
> "here is how we get there." The roadmap uses timeframes, not status —
|
||||
> most of it is not implemented yet, so a status column would be noise.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The unblock path is clear — here is the 12-month
|
||||
> product arc."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 14 — 12-Month Product Roadmap
|
||||
|
||||
**The product arc from pilot activation to integration — four quarters,
|
||||
four outcomes.**
|
||||
|
||||
| Quarter | Theme | Board-level outcome |
|
||||
|---------|-------|---------------------|
|
||||
| **Q1** | Pilot Activation | Nova runs a real customer estate end-to-end, autonomously, with a measurable zero-touch rate. |
|
||||
| **Q2** | Provable Trust | Every automated decision lands in a tamper-evident ledger; the CFO sees real cloud-spend reconciliation. |
|
||||
| **Q3** | Compounding ROI | Quarter-over-quarter cloud spend drops; drift is detected and reversed without a human. |
|
||||
| **Q4** | Integration & Predictive | AI agents deploy through Nova by default; the ML anomaly-forecasting service goes live. |
|
||||
|
||||
Grounded in the four strategic objectives (autonomy, provable trust, ROI,
|
||||
integration) and the deferred-metric unblock paths.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the 12-month product arc — each quarter activates a
|
||||
> strategic objective and its corresponding board-level metric, from
|
||||
> pilot activation through integration leadership.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The roadmap is organized by product outcome, not
|
||||
> by technical milestone. Each quarter activates one strategic
|
||||
> objective from the North Star.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Here is the quarter-by-quarter detail."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 15 — Quarter-by-Quarter Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
| Quarter | Product theme | Key deliverable | Target metric | Grounding |
|
||||
|---------|---------------|-----------------|---------------|-----------|
|
||||
| **Q1** | Pilot Activation | Re-provision live AWS; activate first pilot estate; onboarding auto-grant | Touchless ≥ 99% · Escalation < 0.1% · Accuracy ≥ 99.5% | Objective #1 — autonomy as the default |
|
||||
| **Q2** | Provable Trust | Tamper-evident ledger (Object Lock + signed checkpoints); daily checkpoints; live cost reconciliation | Decision Ledger Coverage 100% · Cost Savings ≥ 25% | Objective #2 — trust is the moat |
|
||||
| **Q3** | Compounding ROI + Drift | Drift-detection scheduler; auto-reversal; pre-apply → actual-spend reconciliation on the pilot estate | Drift Auto-Reversal ≥ 95% · Spend Reduction ≥ 25% | Objective #3 — CFO-pointable numbers |
|
||||
| **Q4** | Integration + Predictive | ML anomaly-forecasting; AI-agent intent surface; multi-cloud (Azure/GCP) preview | Predictive:Reactive ≥ 3:1 · AI-Agent Intent Share (first measurement) | Objective #4 — default substrate for agents |
|
||||
|
||||
**Month-18 destination:** *"Nova is the layer enterprise leadership
|
||||
points to when they say 'we don't have an infrastructure ops team
|
||||
anymore, and the audit trail is stronger than it ever was.'"*
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** each quarter has a concrete deliverable, a target metric
|
||||
> grounded in a strategic objective, and a path from "honestly deferred"
|
||||
> to "shipped and measured."
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** Q1–Q3 are committed (grounded pipeline + known
|
||||
> unblock paths). Q4 targets are committed-deliverable,
|
||||
> aspirational-metric — the ML service ships, the intent-share number is
|
||||
> a first measurement (we do not control adoption rate).
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Production-grade guidance is how Nova helps the
|
||||
> citizen developer's AI agent meet the bar — here is the first half."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 16 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (1/2)
|
||||
|
||||
**Nova instructs the citizen developer's AI agent on production-grade
|
||||
engineering — a set of skills and an MCP server.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Skills** — markdown files keyed to production-grade engineering
|
||||
domains (API, security, data, testing, observability, errors, DevOps,
|
||||
infrastructure-as-code, compliance). The skills extend the baseline
|
||||
catalog with Nova-specific production-grade principles.
|
||||
- **MCP server** — a plugin-registry, stdio server exposing four tools:
|
||||
`lookup_principle`, `list_domains`, `matrix_lookup`, and
|
||||
`validate_against_principles`. The developer's AI agent (or any
|
||||
agentic SDLC platform) calls these tools to look up the principles
|
||||
that apply to its submission.
|
||||
- **The integration point is the same regardless of source.** Whether
|
||||
the submission comes from an AI coding agent, an agentic SDLC
|
||||
platform, or a traditional IDE, the same skills and MCP server apply.
|
||||
This is how Nova makes the citizen developer production-grade without
|
||||
owning the PDLC.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the citizen developer's AI agent is not unguided — Nova
|
||||
> provides production-grade engineering principles as skills and as an
|
||||
> MCP surface, so submissions arrive at the contract boundary already
|
||||
> aligned with the platform's standards.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** This is the first half of the Atelier story — the
|
||||
> surface (skills + MCP). The next slide is what the surface catches
|
||||
> that deterministic scanners cannot.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Here is what that guidance catches that deterministic
|
||||
> scanners cannot."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 17 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (2/2)
|
||||
|
||||
**Agentic validation catches engineering-discipline gaps that deterministic
|
||||
scanners miss — and the validation is reproducible.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Beyond deterministic scanners.** Wiz, Checkmarx, and Mend check
|
||||
policy and secrets — they do not check engineering discipline. The
|
||||
Atelier MCP server catches correctness, clarity, and observability gaps
|
||||
that deterministic tools cannot: "is this service observable?",
|
||||
"is this error path handled?", "is this API contract clear?"
|
||||
- **Agentic validation, not a second policy engine.** The MCP server
|
||||
gives the AI agent the principles to validate against; the agent does
|
||||
the validation. This is agentic validation — the agent reasons about
|
||||
the submission against the principles, not a second static scan.
|
||||
- **Vendored for audit reproducibility.** Atelier is vendored at a
|
||||
pinned tag. A validation result is replayable against the exact
|
||||
principles that produced it — so an audit can reproduce a validation
|
||||
months later, not just trust a log line.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** the citizen developer's submission is checked for
|
||||
> engineering discipline, not just policy compliance — and the check is
|
||||
> reproducible for audit. That is what makes the submission
|
||||
> production-grade, regardless of which upstream platform produced it.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The value is the gap deterministic scanners leave:
|
||||
engineering discipline. Policy scanners catch "is this S3 bucket
|
||||
public?"; the MCP server catches "is this service observable if that
|
||||
bucket fails?". The vendoring point is audit reproducibility — the
|
||||
validation is not a black box.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "You've seen the problem, the solution, and the proof.
|
||||
> Here is the recap and the ask."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 18 — Recap + Ask
|
||||
|
||||
**The 4-beat recap + the business decision.**
|
||||
|
||||
**Recap:**
|
||||
- **Problem:** product teams own infrastructure without the discipline
|
||||
and lifecycle planning it requires; bandwidth gaps and tribal
|
||||
knowledge leave operations exposed.
|
||||
- **Solution:** autonomous cloud delivery — operations become visible,
|
||||
trust is provable (deterministic scoring), humans at stage gates.
|
||||
- **Proof:** 100% ledger coverage, 100% attestation coverage, grounded
|
||||
ROI formula, four CTO-grade metrics flowing into PowerBI.
|
||||
- **Roadmap:** deferred metrics have unblock paths; the 12-month product
|
||||
arc activates one strategic objective per quarter.
|
||||
|
||||
**The ask:** "Approve a pilot estate to activate the production-denominator
|
||||
metrics (Lead Time, Vulnerability Count, MTTR, Cloud Spend), and approve
|
||||
the tamper-evident ledger build-out to move from the local hash-chain to
|
||||
S3 Object Lock + signed checkpoints. These two decisions move Nova from
|
||||
'pipeline-ready' to 'production-proven.'"
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** a clear business decision — approve a pilot and the ledger
|
||||
> build-out — with the confidence that every claim in this deck is
|
||||
> grounded, derived, or honestly deferred.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The ask is a business decision, not insider
|
||||
> language. "Approve a pilot estate" is a C-suite decision. "Approve the
|
||||
> ledger build-out" is a budget decision. The recap reinforces the 4-beat
|
||||
> arc — the audience leaves with the structure, not a pile of facts.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Appendix A1 — Metrics Glossary
|
||||
|
||||
| KPI | Definition | Status |
|
||||
|-----|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| Touchless Resolution Rate | runs without operational stage-gate block ÷ total | partial (Post-Pilot) |
|
||||
| Human Escalation Frequency | operational stage-gate blocks ÷ total | partial (Post-Pilot) |
|
||||
| Automated Decision Accuracy | decisions not followed by failure within 5min | partial (Post-Pilot) |
|
||||
| MTTR (p95) | apply.failed → successful retry | grounded |
|
||||
| Confidence-Gate Halt Rate | runs with band=block ÷ total | grounded |
|
||||
| Provisioning Lead Time | run.completed − run.started | grounded |
|
||||
| Deployment Frequency | count(run.completed) per day | grounded |
|
||||
| Cost Savings (pre-apply) | sum(delta_usd where delta < 0) | partial (live reconciliation deferred) |
|
||||
| FTE Hours Saved | run count × manual baseline × rate | derived (N=0 caveat) |
|
||||
| Platform ROI | (labor + cloud + avoided downtime) ÷ op cost | derived (N=0 caveat) |
|
||||
| Decision Ledger Coverage | decisions with outcome ÷ total | grounded |
|
||||
| Attestation Coverage | prod/dr attested ÷ total prod/dr | grounded |
|
||||
| Policy Compliance Rate | 1 − failed_assets ÷ total | grounded |
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** a reference for every metric mentioned in the deck.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
> **End of deck.** 18 main slides + 1 appendix slide = 19 total.
|
||||
@@ -1,453 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Nova — The No-Humans Infrastructure Platform
|
||||
|
||||
> **Source of truth** (Step 1 of the 4-step deck process).
|
||||
> Unified narrative deck merging `how-the-platform-works` + `the-developer-experience`.
|
||||
> 5-act arc: Problem → Vision → How → Proof → Roadmap.
|
||||
> x3 structure at deck level (opening = arc preview, body = tell them, closing = recap + ask)
|
||||
> AND per slide (opens with what it covers, delivers, closes with benefit callout).
|
||||
> Act indicator in the Marp footer: `Act N/5: <act name>`.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> **Honesty model:** every metric cited is grounded (cites a source file),
|
||||
> derived (documented formula), or deferred (cites a blocking decision ID).
|
||||
> No fabricated numbers. Deferred metrics marked `<span class="badge planned">Planned</span>`.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> v1.17 — Strategic Direction, Leadership Metrics & Unified Story (REQ-196, REQ-197)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 1 — Arc Preview (the "what I'm going to tell you" deck-level opening)
|
||||
|
||||
This deck proves Nova is the no-humans infrastructure platform — and shows you the metrics that make the claim defensible.
|
||||
|
||||
**Today:** 18 capabilities verified, 0 consumer estates in production. This deck shows what's proven, what's pipeline-ready, and what's honestly deferred.
|
||||
|
||||
The 5-act arc:
|
||||
1. **Problem** — why the operator is the bottleneck
|
||||
2. **Vision** — Nova's strategic direction (NORTH_STAR)
|
||||
3. **How** — the pipeline, Decision Ledger, attestation gates
|
||||
4. **Proof** — grounded metrics that make the claim defensible
|
||||
5. **Roadmap** — deferred metrics with unblock paths + the ask
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you leave this deck knowing which claims are proven today, which are pipeline-ready, and which are deferred with a documented unblock path — no marketing, just grounded evidence.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The stake line (18V + 0 consumers) sets the honesty frame. The audience knows from slide 1 that this is not a hype deck — it's an evidence deck. The arc preview orients them for the next 15 slides.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 2 — The No-Humans Imperative
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows why the operator is the bottleneck — and why removing them from operations (not accountability) is the imperative.
|
||||
|
||||
- **The cost of humans-in-the-loop:** L1/L2 ops hours, escalation latency, the trust gap (autonomous claims without proof)
|
||||
- **The operator is the bottleneck:** provisioning takes days, not minutes; escalations pile up; the trust gap means "autonomous" is a marketing claim, not a defensible one
|
||||
- **The attestation model:** autonomy in operations, human at stage gates — not "no humans ever"
|
||||
- Cites `docs/NO_HUMANS_THESIS.md` (the thesis, grounded proof, deferred proof, anti-claims)
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the problem framing — autonomy in operations, human at stage gates, is the path forward.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The key reframing: "no-humans" means no human in the loop of *normal operations*. Stage-gate attestation (QA for production, SRE for operational readiness) remains human by design. This is not about removing humans from accountability — only from operations.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Having defined the problem, here is Nova's strategic direction toward solving it."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 3 — Nova's Vision
|
||||
|
||||
This slide states Nova's vision — infrastructure operations become invisible, with provable trust.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Infrastructure operations become invisible. Every environment provisioned, every incident healed, every risk remediated — by an autonomous system whose trustworthiness is provable, not promised. Human attestation remains required at stage gates — QA signs off for production, SRE greenlights based on operational readiness — but the operator is never in the loop of normal operations.**
|
||||
|
||||
- The attestation model: human attestation required at stage gates (QA for production, SRE for operational readiness); autonomy in operations, not in accountability
|
||||
- Cites `docs/NO_HUMANS_THESIS.md` (the thesis, grounded proof, deferred proof, anti-claims incl. D-122 honesty)
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the destination — invisible operations with provable trust, not promised trust. And you know the attestation model: humans at stage gates, not in the ops loop.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The vision is ambitious but precise. "Provable, not promised" is the key phrase — it's the difference between a marketing claim and a defensible one. The attestation clarification is stated up front so the audience doesn't mishear "no-humans" as "no accountability."
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The vision is ambitious — here are the 4 strategic objectives that make it concrete."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 4 — Strategic Objectives + Anti-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
This slide pairs what Nova is building toward (4 objectives) with what Nova refuses to build (5 anti-goals).
|
||||
|
||||
**4 Strategic Objectives:**
|
||||
1. **Demonstrate production-grade zero-touch operations** — autonomy as the default, not the demo
|
||||
2. **Establish provable trust in AI decisions** — Decision Ledger, confidence scoring, circuit breakers, blast-radius controls
|
||||
3. **Deliver compounding, quantifiable ROI** — each quarter must reduce spend, free hours, avoid downtime measurably
|
||||
4. **Become the default substrate for agentic infrastructure consumption** — the platform AI agents reach for first
|
||||
|
||||
**5 Anti-Goals (what Nova is NOT):**
|
||||
1. Not a Terraform, Kubernetes, or hyperscaler competitor
|
||||
2. Not a general-purpose AI agent platform
|
||||
3. Not a system that removes humans from accountability
|
||||
4. Not for legacy, untagged, or freeform infrastructure
|
||||
5. Not sold to operators
|
||||
|
||||
From `NORTH_STAR.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the scope boundaries — Nova is purpose-built for infrastructure operations, sold to leadership on outcomes, and explicitly not a general-purpose AI platform or a hyperscaler competitor.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The anti-goals are as important as the objectives. They tell the audience what Nova will NOT be distracted by. Anti-goal #3 (not removing humans from accountability) reinforces the attestation model from slide 3.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The objectives are committed to measurable targets — here is the 12–18 month scorecard, with honest grounding status."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 5 — 12–18 Month Targets (the scorecard)
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the committed targets — numbers a board member can repeat back — with their grounding status.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current-milestone targets (grounded or derived this milestone):**
|
||||
|
||||
| Domain | Target | Status |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| MTTR (p95) | < 60 seconds | grounded (platform-run) |
|
||||
| Cloud Spend Reduction | ≥ 25% on pilot estates | partial (Infracost grounded; CUR deferred D-096) |
|
||||
| L1/L2 Ops Hours Avoided | ≥ 70% of pre-Nova FTE | derived (N internal runs; prod activates post-pilot) |
|
||||
| Platform ROI | ≥ 250% annually | derived (formula; N internal runs caveat) |
|
||||
| Decision Ledger Coverage | 100% of AI actions | grounded (this milestone builds it) |
|
||||
| Attestation Coverage | 100% of prod/dr promotions | grounded |
|
||||
|
||||
**Post-Pilot targets (pipeline grounded; denominator activates with a pilot estate):**
|
||||
|
||||
| Domain | Target | Status |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Touchless Resolution Rate | ≥ 99% | partial (pipeline grounded; 0 consumers today) |
|
||||
| Human Escalation Frequency | < 0.1% | partial (pipeline grounded; 0 consumers today) |
|
||||
| AI Decision Accuracy | ≥ 99.5% | partial (pipeline grounded; 0 consumers today) |
|
||||
|
||||
**Deferred targets:** Predictive vs Reactive ≥3:1 <span class="badge planned">Planned</span> · Drift Auto-Reversal ≥95% <span class="badge planned">Planned</span>
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the destination numbers — and which ones are measurable today vs deferred honestly. The Post-Pilot targets are committed; the pipeline works; the numbers fill when a pilot estate runs.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The three-section split (current / post-pilot / deferred) is the honesty model. The "partial" status means the measurement pipeline is grounded but the denominator is zero (0 consumers). This is the same honesty as Cloud Spend (Infracost grounded, CUR deferred). A board member can see exactly which numbers are real today and which are waiting for a pilot.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The targets are committed — here is how Nova works to achieve them."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 6 — The Platform Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the contract-to-evidence pipeline — how intent becomes verified infrastructure without an operator.
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
graph LR
|
||||
A[Contract] --> B[Resolver]
|
||||
B --> C[Adapter]
|
||||
C --> D[Terraform Plan]
|
||||
D --> E[Checkov Policy]
|
||||
E --> F[Confidence Signal]
|
||||
F --> G{HITL Gate}
|
||||
G -->|dev: autonomous| H[Apply]
|
||||
G -->|qa/prod/dr: attested| H
|
||||
H --> I[Evidence + Outbox]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- Contract → resolver → adapter → terraform plan → Checkov (policy) → confidence signal → HITL gate (dev autonomous; qa/prod/dr attested) → apply → evidence
|
||||
- Grounded in `scripts/run_platform.sh` + `core/contract_resolver.py` + `adapters/terraform/adapter.py` + `core/confidence_signal.py`
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the path from intent to evidence — and where the human appears (stage gates only, not in the ops loop).
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The pipeline is the engine. The key insight: dev is autonomous (no HITL gate); qa/prod/dr require human attestation. The confidence signal is the "AI" — it's a 6-input weighted score, not an LLM. The HITL gate is where the human appears, but only for qa/prod/dr, not for dev.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The pipeline produces decisions — here is how every decision is captured and made accountable."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 7 — The Decision Ledger
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the Decision Ledger — every AI decision captured with confidence, alternatives, and outcome.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Architecture:** `outbox_writer.py` extended → SQLite append-only hash-chain table
|
||||
- **`ai.decision.made` events:** decision_id=run_id, chosen_action=band, confidence=score, alternatives=perInput, human_override=HITL block, outcome backfilled from apply.completed
|
||||
- **`attestation.recorded` events:** qa/prod/dr sign-offs (approver, env, concerns, result)
|
||||
- D-121, D-122, D-132. Honors D-083 (no S3 Object Lock/JWS — local hash-chain this milestone)
|
||||
|
||||
**D-122 honesty:** Nova's "AI" is the confidence-gated policy engine (confidence_signal + HITL gate), not an LLM planner. The Decision Ledger captures this real decision path — not a fabricated "AI agent" that doesn't exist yet.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know why 'autonomous' is defensible — every decision is immutable, queryable, and accountable. And you know exactly what 'AI' means here: a confidence-gated policy engine, not a black-box LLM.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The D-122 honesty sentence is critical. If the audience walks away thinking Nova has an LLM planner, we've violated the "no fabrication" constraint. The Decision Ledger is the trust substrate (NORTH_STAR Objective #2) — it's the moat. Features can be copied; an immutable, queryable decision history cannot.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Decisions are captured — here is how stage-gate attestation keeps humans in accountability."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 8 — The 8-Concern Attestation Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the 8-concern attestation matrix — the designed controls that keep humans at stage gates.
|
||||
|
||||
| Concern | Env | Freshness | Type |
|
||||
|---------|-----|-----------|------|
|
||||
| functional_correctness | qa | 24h | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| performance_baseline | qa | 7d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| security_posture | qa | 24h | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| contract_nfrs | qa/prod/dr | — | offline-testable |
|
||||
| operational_readiness | prod | 30d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| incident_response | prod | 90d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| capacity_cost | prod | 30d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| resilience_dr_drill | prod | 180d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| resilience_chaos | prod | 90d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| resilience_backup | prod | 30d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
| dr_region_deploy | dr | 180d | operator-supplied |
|
||||
|
||||
- Offline-testable concerns run for real; operator-supplied concerns accept signed evidence artifacts
|
||||
- Separation-of-duties on prod (the approver can't be the same person who built it)
|
||||
- Grounded in `core/attestation_matrix.py` + `core/hitl_gates.py`
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the gate model — autonomy in operations, human in accountability, by design. The 8-concern matrix is what makes "no-humans in ops" safe.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The attestation matrix is the human-in-the-loop safeguard. It's not a rubber stamp — it's a structured, freshness-validated, separation-of-duties-enforced gate. This is what Anti-Goal #3 means: "not a system that removes humans from accountability."
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "You've now seen how Nova works — the pipeline, the Decision Ledger, the attestation gates. But 'how it works' is not 'proof it works.' The next four slides show the measured evidence: capability health, trust metrics, efficiency, and cost — every number grounded in a real file, not a marketing claim."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 9 — Telemetry Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows how Nova instruments itself — the CloudEvents envelope, the cold store, and the PowerBI export.
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
graph TB
|
||||
A[Platform components] --> B[CloudEvents 1.0 envelope]
|
||||
B --> C[metrics/events.jsonl]
|
||||
B --> D[metrics/decision_ledger.db]
|
||||
B --> E[metrics/runs/]
|
||||
C --> F[Collector]
|
||||
D --> F
|
||||
E --> F
|
||||
F --> G[metrics/nova_metrics.db]
|
||||
G --> H[metrics/powerbi/]
|
||||
H --> I[PowerBI dashboards]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- Platform components → CloudEvents 1.0 envelope → `metrics/events.jsonl` + `metrics/runs/` + `metrics/decision_ledger.db` → collector → `metrics/nova_metrics.db` (SQLite cold store) → `metrics/powerbi/` (CSV/JSON views) → PowerBI
|
||||
- D-120 (Nova-native), D-125 (hybrid events/files), D-126 (cold-only)
|
||||
- <span class="badge planned">Planned</span>: Hot-path (live ops dashboard) — D-126
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know that every metric in this deck is traceable to a real emitted event — the architecture IS the trust substrate. When a CFO asks 'where does this number come from?', the answer is a file path, not a Slack thread.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The architecture is deliberately minimal (Nova-native, no Kafka/Prometheus/ClickHouse). The hot path is deferred (D-126) — the cold store is sufficient for batch/historical analysis. The key point: every number in the Proof act is traceable to a file path. This is the "no fabrication" constraint made architectural.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The architecture is sound — here is the measured proof."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 10 — Capability Health + Confidence Distribution
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the grounded proof: capability health and confidence distribution from real runs.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capability Health:** 18 Verified + 4 Skipped (post-D-096 teardown) from `.ciagent/REGRESSION_REPORT.json`
|
||||
|
||||
| Status | Count |
|
||||
|--------|-------|
|
||||
| Verified | 18 |
|
||||
| Skipped | 4 |
|
||||
| Broken | 0 |
|
||||
| Decayed | 0 |
|
||||
|
||||
- The 4 Skipped are live-AWS capabilities (CAP-013..016) — honestly skipped because resources are torn down (D-096), not a failure
|
||||
- Confidence distribution: from `metrics/nova_metrics.db` `fact_confidence` — score histogram, band breakdown (pass/halt)
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the platform is verified — 18 capabilities pass, 4 are honestly skipped, 0 broken. The honesty model (Skipped ≠ failure) is what makes the Verified count credible.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The 18V+4S number is the single most important proof point. It says "the platform works, and we're honest about what we can't test." The 4 Skipped are live-AWS capabilities — they're skipped because the live AWS resources are torn down (D-096), not because they're broken. When live AWS is re-provisioned, they reactivate.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Capability health is necessary — here is the trust substrate that makes autonomy defensible."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 11 — Decision Ledger + Attestation Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the trust metrics — Decision Ledger coverage and attestation coverage, both 100%.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Decision Ledger Coverage:** 100% of platform runs emit `ai.decision.made` with outcome backfill (source: `metrics/decision_ledger.db`)
|
||||
- **Attestation Coverage:** 100% of prod/dr promotions attested by a human (source: `hitl_gates.py` + outbox `approver_*` attributes)
|
||||
- **AI Decision Accuracy:** decisions not followed by apply.failed/incident within 5min
|
||||
- The trust-snapshot report (`metrics/TRUST_SNAPSHOT.md`) with chain-integrity verdict
|
||||
- <span class="badge planned">Planned</span>: Tamper-Evident Ledger Checkpoints (D-083)
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the trust is provable — not a marketing claim, a queryable record. The Decision Ledger is the moat; features can be copied, an immutable decision history cannot.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The trust metrics are the "provably trustworthy" proof. Decision Ledger Coverage = 100% means no AI decision is ever lost. Attestation Coverage = 100% means no prod/dr promotion lands without a human sign-off. The chain-integrity verdict (from the trust snapshot) proves the ledger hasn't been tampered with.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Trust is provable — here is the operational efficiency that makes the ROI real."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 12 — Zero-Touch Efficiency
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the zero-touch efficiency metrics — touchless resolution, human escalation, and MTTR.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Touchless Resolution Rate:** runs without operational HITL block ÷ total (attestation gates excluded)
|
||||
- **Human Escalation Frequency:** operational HITL blocks only (confidence-driven; attestation sign-offs excluded)
|
||||
- **MTTR (platform-run):** apply.failed → successful retry (D-131)
|
||||
|
||||
**Post-Pilot caveat:** these three metrics are computed on N internal runs today; the production-denominator activates when a pilot estate runs (see NORTH_STAR Post-Pilot Targets section).
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the zero-touch efficiency is measurable — the pipeline works today on internal runs, and the denominator expands to production estates when a pilot activates.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The Post-Pilot caveat is the honesty model. The pipeline is grounded (it works); the denominator is zero (0 consumers). This is not a fabricated "99% touchless" claim — it's "the measurement works, and the numbers fill when a pilot runs."
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "Efficiency is half the ROI story — here is the cost side."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 13 — Cost & ROI
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the cost estimates and the ROI formula — with honest caveats about the current denominator.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Cost Estimates via Infracost:** pre-apply, grounded (reads plan JSON, offline)
|
||||
- **ROI formula (shown inline):** `Platform ROI = (FTE hours saved × blended rate + cloud savings + avoided downtime) ÷ platform op cost`
|
||||
- **N=0 caveat:** "These derived metrics are computed on N internal runs today; the production-denominator activates post-pilot. The formula is grounded; the production numbers are not yet."
|
||||
- **FTE Hours Saved** (derived), **Platform ROI** (derived formula)
|
||||
- <span class="badge planned">Planned</span>: Live CUR Reconciliation (D-096), Drift Auto-Reversal (D-096)
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the ROI formula — and you know it's computed on internal runs today, not fabricated production numbers. The formula is ready; the production denominator activates with a pilot.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The ROI formula is shown inline — not hidden in a footnote. The N=0 caveat is stated explicitly. This is the "no fabrication" constraint in action: we show the formula, we show the caveat, we don't pretend the production numbers exist.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The proof is grounded — here is what is honestly deferred."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 14 — What's Deferred — and Why
|
||||
|
||||
This slide pairs each deferred metric with its blocking decision — honesty about what isn't measured yet.
|
||||
|
||||
**To be clear:** these deferrals are *measurement infrastructure*, not whether the platform runs without humans. The platform IS autonomous in operations. What's deferred is the *evidence pipeline* for certain metrics — not the autonomy itself.
|
||||
|
||||
| # | Deferred Metric | Blocking Decision |
|
||||
|---|----------------|-------------------|
|
||||
| 1 | Live Infrastructure Health | D-096 |
|
||||
| 2 | Live Outbox Write Rate | D-096 |
|
||||
| 3 | Tamper-Evident Ledger Checkpoints | D-083 |
|
||||
| 4 | Onboarding Funnel (granted) | D-113/D-114/D-119 |
|
||||
| 5 | Drift Auto-Reversal | D-096 + no scheduler |
|
||||
| 6 | Live CUR Reconciliation | D-096 |
|
||||
| 7 | SLA / Unplanned Downtime | D-096 |
|
||||
| 8 | Predictive vs Reactive | future emitter |
|
||||
|
||||
From `docs/METRICS_DEFERRED_ROADMAP.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the boundaries — what Nova measures today, and exactly what blocks the rest. The autonomy is real; the measurement gaps are documented.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The preempt is critical: these deferrals are measurement infrastructure, not autonomy. The platform runs without humans in operations. What's deferred is the evidence pipeline for live-infra health, drift detection, predictive remediation — not the autonomy itself. Showing this slide to leadership demonstrates honesty, not weakness.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The proof is honest — here is the roadmap from here to the 12–18 month targets."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 15 — Roadmap to the North Star
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the path from v1.17's grounded metrics to the 12–18 month targets — the unblock path for each deferred metric.
|
||||
|
||||
- Each deferred metric → blocking decision → unblock requirement → candidate milestone
|
||||
- The hot-path activation section (post-D-096, Nova-native only, D-120)
|
||||
- Re-evaluation triggers: D-096 lift, D-083 lift, onboarding-grant lift
|
||||
|
||||
From `docs/METRICS_DEFERRED_ROADMAP.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the path — every deferred metric has an unblock requirement and a candidate milestone. Nothing is hand-waved; everything has a plan.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The roadmap is the bridge from "honestly deferred" to "here's how we get there." Each deferred metric has a specific unblock requirement and a candidate future milestone. The re-evaluation triggers ensure the metrics layer evolves when the blocking decisions lift.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Transition:** "The roadmap is clear — here is the recap and the ask."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 16 — Recap + Ask (the "what I told you" deck-level closing)
|
||||
|
||||
This slide recaps the 5 acts and states the ask.
|
||||
|
||||
**Recap:**
|
||||
- **Problem:** the operator is the bottleneck; autonomy in operations, human at stage gates
|
||||
- **Vision:** invisible operations with provable trust (NORTH_STAR)
|
||||
- **How:** pipeline + Decision Ledger + 8-concern attestation matrix
|
||||
- **Proof:** 18V+4S, 100% ledger coverage, 100% attestation, grounded ROI formula
|
||||
- **Roadmap:** deferred metrics have unblock paths
|
||||
|
||||
**The ask:** "The ask is a business decision: approve a pilot estate to activate the production-denominator metrics (Touchless Resolution, Human Escalation, AI Decision Accuracy), and approve the tamper-evident ledger build-out (D-083 lift) to move from local hash-chain to S3 Object Lock + JWS. These two decisions move Nova from 'pipeline-ready' to 'production-proven.'"
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you leave with a clear business decision to make — approve a pilot + the ledger build-out — and the confidence that every claim in this deck is grounded, derived, or honestly deferred.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Speaker notes:** The ask is a business decision, not insider language. "Approve a pilot estate" is something a C-suite can decide. "Approve the ledger build-out" is a budget decision. The recap reinforces the 5-act arc — the audience leaves with the structure, not a pile of facts.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Appendix Slide A1 — Metrics Glossary
|
||||
|
||||
This appendix defines every KPI in one line with its grounding badge.
|
||||
|
||||
| KPI | Definition | Status |
|
||||
|-----|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| Touchless Resolution Rate | runs without operational HITL block ÷ total | partial (Post-Pilot) |
|
||||
| Human Escalation Frequency | operational HITL blocks ÷ total | partial (Post-Pilot) |
|
||||
| AI Decision Accuracy | decisions not followed by failure within 5min | partial (Post-Pilot) |
|
||||
| MTTR (p95) | apply.failed → successful retry | grounded |
|
||||
| Confidence-Gate Halt Rate | runs with band=block ÷ total | grounded |
|
||||
| Provisioning Lead Time | run.completed − run.started | grounded |
|
||||
| Deployment Frequency | count(run.completed) per day | grounded |
|
||||
| Cost Savings (Infracost) | sum(delta_usd where delta < 0) | partial (CUR deferred) |
|
||||
| FTE Hours Saved | run count × manual baseline × rate | derived (N=0 caveat) |
|
||||
| Platform ROI | (labor + cloud + avoided downtime) ÷ op cost | derived (N=0 caveat) |
|
||||
| Decision Ledger Coverage | decisions with outcome ÷ total | grounded |
|
||||
| Attestation Coverage | prod/dr attested ÷ total prod/dr | grounded |
|
||||
| Policy Compliance Rate | 1 − failed_assets ÷ total | grounded |
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now have a reference for every metric mentioned in the deck.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Appendix Slide A2 — Operating Model & Cost
|
||||
|
||||
This appendix shows the real cost figures + the zero-cost steady state.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Cost figures** from `COST.md`: $0.001883 over 8 days, ~$0.007/month, S3-dominated, zero BAU compute
|
||||
- **Zero-cost steady state:** all resources torn down post-v1.11 (D-096); the platform runs offline
|
||||
- References the pre-mortem (`PRE_MORTEM.md`: v1.10 decay root cause + four forward failure modes + structural mitigations)
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the operating cost is negligible — and the structural mitigation that prevents decay.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
> **End of deck.** 16 main slides + 2 appendix slides = 18 total.
|
||||
> Both old decks (`how-the-platform-works` + `the-developer-experience`) are retired (D-130).
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 20 — 12-Month Product Roadmap
|
||||
|
||||
**The product arc from pilot activation to agentic substrate — four quarters, four outcomes.**
|
||||
|
||||
This slide shows the 12-month product roadmap — the forward-looking product-outcome arc. It is distinct from Slide 15 (the deferred-metric unblock paths), which explains *why* metrics are deferred and *how* they unblock. This slide shows *what's coming, when* — organized by quarter and board-level outcome.
|
||||
|
||||
**Speaker notes:**
|
||||
|
||||
- The roadmap is organized by product outcome, not by technical milestone. Each quarter activates one strategic objective from the North Star.
|
||||
- Q1 is pilot activation — re-provision live AWS, light up the first pilot estate, and activate the three post-pilot denominator metrics (Touchless Resolution Rate, Human Escalation Frequency, AI Decision Accuracy). The onboarding auto-grant ships, so consumers can self-provision without platform-team intervention.
|
||||
- Q2 is provable trust — the audit substrate goes from a SQLite hash-chain to a tamper-evident ledger (S3 Object Lock + JWS daily checkpoints). Live cost reconciliation (CUR) goes live so the CFO sees real cloud-spend data, not just pre-apply Infracost estimates.
|
||||
- Q3 is compounding ROI + drift — drift detection ships (the scheduler that was deferred), drift auto-reversal activates (≥95% within one detection cycle), and the ≥25% spend-reduction target is measured against the pilot estate's 12-month pre-Nova baseline. This is the quarter the CFO points to a number that improves quarter-over-quarter.
|
||||
- Q4 is agentic substrate + predictive — the ML anomaly-forecasting service ships (predictive-vs-reactive ≥3:1), the AI-agent intent consumption surface goes live, and multi-cloud (Azure/GCP) enters preview. The Future Horizon target (AI-Agent Intent Share ≥40%) moves from aspiration to first measurement.
|
||||
|
||||
**The month-18 destination:** *"Nova is the layer enterprise leadership points to when they say 'we don't have an infrastructure ops team anymore, and the audit trail is stronger than it ever was' — and it is the default substrate their AI engineering teams reach for first when an agent needs to deploy."*
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the 12-month product arc — each quarter activates a strategic objective and its corresponding board-level metric, from pilot activation through agentic substrate leadership.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Slide 21 — Quarter-by-Quarter Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
This slide is the detail table behind Slide 20 — the concrete deliverable, target metric, and strategic-objective grounding for each quarter.
|
||||
|
||||
**Speaker notes:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Each row has a product theme (the narrative), a key deliverable (what ships), a target metric (the board-level number), and a grounding (which strategic objective it activates).
|
||||
- Q1's three target metrics (Touchless ≥99%, Escalation <0.1%, Accuracy ≥99.5%) are the post-pilot metrics from the North Star — their measurement pipeline is grounded this milestone, but the denominator is zero until a pilot estate activates. Q1 is when the denominator goes live.
|
||||
- Q2's Decision Ledger Coverage (100%) is already grounded; the *tamper-evidence* is the Q2 upgrade. Cost Savings ≥25% is the Infracost-grounded target — Q2 is when actual-spend reconciliation (CUR) makes it CFO-grade.
|
||||
- Q3's Drift Auto-Reversal ≥95% is the deferred metric that unblocks when the drift detection scheduler ships. Spend Reduction ≥25% is the same target, now measured against the pilot baseline (not just estimated).
|
||||
- Q4's Predictive:Reactive ≥3:1 requires the ML forecasting service — the most technically ambitious deliverable. AI-Agent Intent Share ≥40% is the Future Horizon target — it moves from aspiration to first measurement when the agentic consumption surface goes live.
|
||||
- The roadmap does NOT duplicate the 19 completed technical milestones (v1.0–v1.19) — it is forward-looking only. It does NOT duplicate Slide 15's deferred-metric unblock paths — it uses them as the mechanism, but the audience sees the product arc, not the decision IDs.
|
||||
|
||||
> **Benefit:** you now know the quarter-by-quarter detail — each quarter has a concrete deliverable, a target metric grounded in a strategic objective, and a path from "honestly deferred" to "shipped and measured."
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user